I completely agree with mant of the elements of your statement below. Time marches on with every high end state of the art product. The very 1st consumer CD players by Sony/Phillips were well over $1000.00 Now you can get ones that even better audio qualities for $25.00 . Same thing in photography...th original Nikon D1 body was exactly $5000.00 . Now not only are those bodies in mint condition worth only $200.00 or less, one can purchase a 35mm DLSR for under $500.00 that has image qualities head and shoulders above the D1.
The Pentax 645D is still priced high for a number of reasons, some obvious and some not so obvious although like every product that came before it, is bound to hold its position in the market place after a few years. For one to get the level of performance out of the D800 that its capabale of and have it coming close to the 645D...one has to invest in the absolute best Nikon lenses....many costing between $1500-2000 for each one. I can tell you from my testing of it...lesser lenses will take a nice image, but not really coming close to what the D800 is capable of. In that case, may as well get a D700/D7000. With the 645D due to both the sensor size as well as the used price of most of the 645D lenses....once you get done putting together both systems with an array of lenses, the price difference between both systems narrows considerably. You'd be amazed by how much. Yes, the Pentax lenses are slower, but each system requires lenses to be stopped down to extract what each system is capable of. Some of the Pentax 645 lenses are amazingly cheap and a fraction of what it would cost to get a similary priced/performing Nikon lens.
Lastly for the additional money one is paying, there are certain advnatages in the 645D, besides those of performance gains, which one most certainly obtains (I addressed this in many of my posts above). If you travel and/hike, the weather resistance of the body and some lenses is not simply a few rain drops or light sprinkle. This camera can truly takes an amazing amount of weather related conditions without blinking an eye. You cannot underestimate the value of this unless of course one doesn't need or use it. Thats one of the many features it was specifically designed for. Specialized equipment will always cost more. Sure a rain jacket for the D800 works fine in a short lived light rain, but some of the most spectacular images are often captured in the most inhospitable conditons. Again not everyone needs or reqauires this.
Then there is the way skin and skin tones are reproduced by the 645D. As good as the D800 is and is certainly better than many previous 35mm DSLRs, it is in my opinion and some others who have tested the D800 and 645D, agree that the 645D also excels as a studio/portrait camera. How much this is worth it to some, depends on how they are going to use the camera.
Yet I can make a list of all the ways the D800 is a best buy and run rings around the 645D in many areas of photography...so each tool has it's purpose and advantages. Even if the entire 645D system, once put together costs more than a comparable D800 system, the last 10-15% of advantges of one system over another, is always disproportionate to comparative costs of two systems....as unfortunate as that may be.
Yes, until the D800 was released, the 645D was certainly a bet buy in what you got for the money. That doesn't hold true anymore, but on the other hand, it's still a very valuable tool for those that need and can use to their advanatge what this system still offers over many at its present price point. No longer a best buy but still competitive and ultimately it will need to come down in price to maintain its advanatge
or more advanced version of it at the same price point will ultimately have to be produced. It's that way with all products....unfortunately. DSLR's, whether they be 35mm or medium format have never been good investments from simply looking at what they cost when new and a number of years later.
645D users on dpreview are but a miniscule fraction of those using it worldwide, so I wouldn't judge users here as representitive of the majorty of real world use or ownership of this particular camera.
One thing for certain, I am very impressed with both the D800 and 645D, but for very different and many reasons aside from the similar resolution of their sensors. In fact I would say, putting aside the resolution, the cameras are very different and used for many situations that are quite unique to each bodies abilities. Pick the tool that best fits the job and budget and in the long run, it will be a good and satisfying investment.
Dave
D800 is $3,000
If $10,000 was an affordable price, then everyone here would have 645D.
$10,000 for a dslr camera is crazy money. Thats half the cost of brand new truck I'm looking at buying.
Anyone who wants to see the output of 645D should drop $10,000 on it.
Or drop $3,000 on Nikon D800 and have another $7,000 left for lenses.
I wonder, are there more than 10 people who post on all of dpreview that own 645D ?
I can only think of 5 photographers who own 645D here at Dpreview forums.
When it comes down to opening the wallet, laying down the cash, I think many here find $10,000 too high a price to pay for two year old tech 645D.
Today the choice is 2010 tech 645D at $10,000 versus an affordable $3,000 outlay for 2012 tech D800 and a bunch of brand new Nikon made lenses, all with 5 year warranties...
Dave, I'm with you on not posting images on gear forums.
